[Skip to content]

MEMBERS' LOG IN
.

Apr 28th - - Australian Associated Press - NATO debates Australian partnership

Jean-Yves Hine, an expert at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, said the partnership idea underlined NATO's transformation from a Cold War body ensuring mutual defence to an organisation taking on a global security role.
 
"NATO is everywhere," he said, noting its missions in Afghanistan, Iraq and Sudan and its disaster relief operations in Pakistan.
 
"It's quite right that other countries, such as Australia, have a say in its defence planning," he said.
IISS in the press icon
28 April 2006:  AAP
 
From correspondents in Sofia, Bulgaria

UNDER US pressure, NATO launched a debate today on forging formal partnerships with Pacific rim states such as Australia and New Zealand as it expands its role to fight threats around the globe.

NATO chief Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said the Alliance "has to spread its wings because it is increasingly being called upon", as foreign ministers from the 26 nation organisation gathered for a two day meeting in Bulgaria.
 
The proposal to forming privileged ties with Australia and New Zealand - and possibly South Korea and Japan as well - would reflect the active role those countries play in NATO missions, while falling short of full membership.
 
The idea is to bring into NATO's sphere of influence "like-minded, democratic nations that do have similar interests ... in global security", a NATO official said in the Bulgarian capital Sofia.
 
NATO spokesman James Appathurai told reporters that the Alliance had no intention to become "a global policeman" or shift its centre of gravity away from its Euro-Atlantic roots.
 
But, he said, today's "threats are global, or transnational at least, and we have to make sure that the team that addresses them is transnational".
 
He said that Australia and New Zealand were the top candidates for NATO partnerships "because they are already in the field with us, next to us, contributing to our operations".
 
For Washington, a special NATO partnership with Australia, Japan and South Korea would reinforce military links to countries contributing to its ad hoc "coalition of the willing" in Iraq.
 
It would also boost its influence somewhat within NATO, which was riven along US-European lines over the 2003 Iraq invasion.
 
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who arrived at the NATO meeting directly from a surprise visit to Baghdad, looked on as Mr De Hoop Scheffer stressed that "no decisions are anticipated" during the meeting.
Nevertheless, some overtures have already been made. New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark and Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer both recently visited NATO headquarters in Brussels. Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Aso is due to go there in early May. High-level contacts have also been made with South Korea.
 
Australia and New Zealand have troops in the currently 9000-strong NATO deployment in Afghanistan.
 
Some NATO members are cautious about a soft pseudo-expansion of the Alliance into the Asian region.
"We're talking about what? The Pacific, Taiwan? ... That risks upsetting China and Russia," one diplomat said.
"If it's about creating a global club meant to solve all the world's problems, the Europeans are wary," another said.
 
Jean-Yves Hine, an expert at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, said the partnership idea underlined NATO's transformation from a Cold War body ensuring mutual defence to an organisation taking on a global security role.
 
"NATO is everywhere," he said, noting its missions in Afghanistan, Iraq and Sudan and its disaster relief operations in Pakistan.
 
"It's quite right that other countries, such as Australia, have a say in its defence planning," he said.
But even if Australia or the other Pacific states become partners, they should not expect NATO membership because the recently expanded Alliance is already struggling with its consensus driven decision-making process, he said.
 
The advantage of associated status, he said, was that "the bigger the pool of force available, the better it is".